Mr. Speaker, I am glad to join the debate on the motion.
The idea of post-secondary education has come up a number of times in the House. To listen to the various parties one would think it was an issue of great concern but in actual fact the track record has been that the Liberal government has been cutting funding for post-secondary education in a significant way ever since it has had the power to do so. Since 1995, $1.5 billion has been removed from federal funding to post-secondary education. These are startling figures.
The motion as put forward by the member for Vancouver East tries to remedy the problem. It tries to say something about access to funding for post-secondary education for the many students who need it and who are not getting it.
Virtually every study emphasizes the need for a highly skilled workforce and more education. We are hearing the point made over and over again that grade 12 is not enough any more. At least one post-secondary degree is needed to make it in the world of work today. When the public schools act came into place in the 1930s, grade 12 was adequate. That is why it was decided that it should be freely accessible to everyone who wanted it and needed it. Students were strongly encouraged to stay in school to at least get their grade 12.
The facts have changed. All the experts are telling us 15 years to 17 years of education is the minimum. Although I understand why the motion was put forward and I believe in it, it does not go far enough. Our caucus is calling for free tuition. I believe that we should join the 27 countries in the world that already provide education free of charge to all the students who have hopes, ambitions or aspirations to join the workforce of the 20th century with the tools that they need.
Only 15% of students actually graduate; 15% of our youth are getting the education they need. What we are hearing is that many more students would take part in post-secondary education were it not for the insurmountable barrier of access to affordable loans so that they can follow through with their dreams and ambitions.
In a 1997 survey of high school students in the maritimes, 40% of the students interviewed not going to university said they were not going because they could not afford it. They simply could not get the wherewithal to go to school.
The average student debt in the country is $25,000. That is up from a $13,000 average since 1993 when the Liberals took power. The average debt in 1993 was $13,000; today the average debt is $25,000. It is not tolerable and it is inconsistent with what we know about the need for access to post-secondary education.
Bankruptcies for students who are trying to pay off student loans are at record levels. They have increased by 700% since 1989. The number of students who are struggling to repay student loans and have been forced into bankruptcy has increased 700% since 1989, figures that we should be shocked at.
Currently 130,000 students are in default on student loans. This is not because of a lack of will or because they are charlatans or they are trying to defraud the system. Simply the structure of the system is such that it is not possible for them to get the education they need and make good on their loans.
It is easy to see why. Over the last 10 years tuition fees have climbed by 240%. When $1.5 billion in federal funding has been cut from post-secondary education, it is not hard to see why tuition fees had to go up. It is a natural consequence of starving our post-secondary institutions.
We are going in the direction of whole costing our tuition to where all the cost of tuition would be borne by the student. It was never the idea when we embraced the idea of accessible post-secondary education for it to be to the point where tuition fees almost have to match the whole cost of education. It is completely 180 degrees opposite from what most Canadians would embrace. This is the reason that we have to start looking at broadening the public schools act to include post-secondary education.
Maybe we could say that the first degree would be free of charge to students. It sounds like a radical idea but we have to start seeding that idea today and then find a way to make it happen and bring it to fruition. If we do not start talking about it now, it simply is not going to happen.
I would like to point to the example of the country of Ireland, my homeland. At a certain point in recent history, it was very slow to attract investment and have job opportunities for its young people.
The reason Ireland is enjoying a bit of an opportunity now and a bit of an increase in investment with high tech companies coming to that country is that it has the highest skilled workforce in terms of academic excellence in the world. Even though Ireland had high levels of unemployment, it never sacrificed the idea of post-secondary education for its people. Ireland knew it was building the base that would eventually attract the type of business and the type of investment that would ultimately lead it out of the economic slump it was in.
There is a real lesson to be learned there. We may say that we have high unemployment and that we need transition from school to work for young people. In actual fact, we need a more highly skilled workforce to where every student who has the ability can go forward as far as their ability will take them in a chosen field of study in post-secondary education.
The motion we are speaking to today, Motion No. 132, hopes to rectify this injustice but it is also really to highlight what can only be looked at as Liberal hypocrisy in this matter. To pretend that there is a real interest in post-secondary education and at the same time cut $1.5 billion out of funding for those institutions is such a glaring contradiction that more and more Canadians are starting to see how fundamentally wrong it is and how fundamentally wrong-headed it is.
It is said that poverty is a consequence of poor education and also a cause of poor education. We can bring this whole subject around to the issue of the war on poverty and the redistribution of wealth. One of the ways people who are stuck in the bottom echelons of the economic system can pull themselves up is to have the marketable skills that they need to go forward and follow their chosen field.
I am not saying that is the be all and end all. There are other aspects to post-secondary education. The universities do not have a monopoly on providing the skills people need.
I am a journeyman carpenter myself. I like to think of apprenticeship as legitimate post-secondary education. I would like to see any student loans initiative broadened to include labour market training as well as the more traditional B.A., Bachelor of Education or Bachelor of Science.
We know that the institutions are in crisis through lack of funding. They passed on that crisis to students. It is students who are now in a crisis. They need relief. They need a remedy and they need some support. That is why this motion would take us at least one step in the way to providing some satisfaction.